Malik McDowell

[sutz]

It has been mentioned in this thread that there is no record of the ATV accident. Where did this accident supposedly occur? Does that state require personal injury accidents to be reported? If so, then there should be a police report. If this was never reported to the police, then why not? Was he under the influence of alcohol or drugs? There are a lot of unanswered questions in this post. If he was involved in a serious personal injury accident, then there should definitely be some sort of police report. One of the most common reasons why accidents like this go unreported, is because the driver is intoxicated.

I've never done any off-road ATVing, but if I were involved in an accident and I was the only one involved, it would never occur to me to report it to the police.

I have done a LOT OF OFF road ATVing...We have a lot of fun. A friend just got a killer a couple of years ago...and it almost had another. He got rid of it. NO accident filed as we were in our area. He has another wheeler and has learned the rules better. We also use them as a hunting tool. I rolled mine too but it was a slow roll. I have 3 of them. I do not wear a helmet as it is my choice and I pay attention to what is going on around me. Them deer better start paying more attention too. It is my life, I choose to do what I do. Have a great day.

I've also done a ton of riding in my life. If I had to guess, I'd say the number of days I've spent riding in the past 20 years is somewhere in the several hundreds. I ride a pretty highly modified high performance 700 sport quad and all the guys I ride with ride similar high performance machines. We like to go fast and we like to ride challenging terrain. Due to the nature of what we ride and how we ride, accidents are fairly common. Over the years we've had an untold number of injuries, everything from bumps, bruises, and cuts/scrapes to broken arms, legs, ribs, torn ACL's, concussions, etc. None of these have ever been reported to the police. The thought has never occurred to me and quite frankly, I have no idea what the point would be. Could you just imagine that conversation?

Me: "Hey, just wanted to report that my buddy crashed his quad and broke his leg."
Police: "Do you require assistance?"
Me: "No, just reporting the incident."
Police: "Why? What do you expect us to do with that information?"
Me: "I don't know, just thought I was supposed to report it."
Police: "So no laws were broken and you don't require assistance?"
Me: "Correct."
Police: "Uh, OK. Good luck and have a nice day."

I mean, I'm sorry, but this idea that there would be a police report for a guy that crashed his quad is pretty absurd. Even if it is a law that something like that must be reported, and I highly doubt that it is, I don't think most people would even know about it and most of those that did know about it probably wouldn't bother.

TL;DR, LOL at the idea that there should/would be a record of an ATV accident and even bigger LOL at the idea that there must be some conspiracy or cover up because there is no record of some dude messing around and crashing his ATV.

Do you guys even think this stuff through before you post?

Yeah, reporting off-road incidents seems a bit of a stretch. I doubt if that applies anywhere and would be difficult to report anyway. I guess there would be an insurance claim of some kind for repair/personal injury treatment, assuming it is a major spill. Overall, though, I'm not sure there are that many laws about off-road riding beyond don't start forest fires and minimize the damage you do.

 

[chris98251]

Really we probably have heard nothing because these guys threatened his family if he told that it was them.

 

[sutz]

Are you sure it was a squirrel?

[youtube]Nvs5pqf-DMA[/youtube]

 

[chris98251]

Are you sure it was a squirrel?

[youtube]Nvs5pqf-DMA[/youtube]

LOL run away run away....

 

[sutz]

Are you sure it was a squirrel?

[youtube]Nvs5pqf-DMA[/youtube]

LOL run away run away....

Obviously the source of the Napkin Defense.

:twisted:

 

[King Dog]

At this point I guess we have to assume he's just fine since he's out partying at the clubs

 

[WmHBonney]

I've never done any off-road ATVing, but if I were involved in an accident and I was the only one involved, it would never occur to me to report it to the police.

I have done a LOT OF OFF road ATVing...We have a lot of fun. A friend just got a killer a couple of years ago...and it almost had another. He got rid of it. NO accident filed as we were in our area. He has another wheeler and has learned the rules better. We also use them as a hunting tool. I rolled mine too but it was a slow roll. I have 3 of them. I do not wear a helmet as it is my choice and I pay attention to what is going on around me. Them deer better start paying more attention too. It is my life, I choose to do what I do. Have a great day.

I've also done a ton of riding in my life. If I had to guess, I'd say the number of days I've spent riding in the past 20 years is somewhere in the several hundreds. I ride a pretty highly modified high performance 700 sport quad and all the guys I ride with ride similar high performance machines. We like to go fast and we like to ride challenging terrain. Due to the nature of what we ride and how we ride, accidents are fairly common. Over the years we've had an untold number of injuries, everything from bumps, bruises, and cuts/scrapes to broken arms, legs, ribs, torn ACL's, concussions, etc. None of these have ever been reported to the police. The thought has never occurred to me and quite frankly, I have no idea what the point would be. Could you just imagine that conversation?

Me: "Hey, just wanted to report that my buddy crashed his quad and broke his leg."
Police: "Do you require assistance?"
Me: "No, just reporting the incident."
Police: "Why? What do you expect us to do with that information?"
Me: "I don't know, just thought I was supposed to report it."
Police: "So no laws were broken and you don't require assistance?"
Me: "Correct."
Police: "Uh, OK. Good luck and have a nice day."

I mean, I'm sorry, but this idea that there would be a police report for a guy that crashed his quad is pretty absurd. Even if it is a law that something like that must be reported, and I highly doubt that it is, I don't think most people would even know about it and most of those that did know about it probably wouldn't bother.

TL;DR, LOL at the idea that there should/would be a record of an ATV accident and even bigger LOL at the idea that there must be some conspiracy or cover up because there is no record of some dude messing around and crashing his ATV.

Do you guys even think this stuff through before you post?

Yeah, reporting off-road incidents seems a bit of a stretch. I doubt if that applies anywhere and would be difficult to report anyway. I guess there would be an insurance claim of some kind for repair/personal injury treatment, assuming it is a major spill. Overall, though, I'm not sure there are that many laws about off-road riding beyond don't start forest fires and minimize the damage you do.

As I said, it is a law in NY. It doesn't matter where the accident occurred. Just because you don't believe it, doesn't make you correct. The same requirement to report a personal injury accident applies to snowmobile and boating accidents also. Maybe it isn't a law where you ride but it is a law in NY.

 

[jammerhawk]

True, zero reason to cut bait with him. The fact that he didn't play a down means they have him for the full original contract, which if he turns out to be a great player, nice.

Not necessarily will the team be stuck with him for the full original contract. He could be cut after the preseason and the team just stuck with the prorated bonus. Alternatively, his contract would have tolled b/c of the full season on NFI so the team would be able to keep him for 4 further seasons on his rookie deal.

My view is wait and see.

 

[rossob]

Easy to say after the fact that a pick was horrible. .

except the fact that the concerns about his motivation were expressed PRIOR to the draft and it is why he fell........

You go back to the draft forum and we were MANY that were pissed that they kept trading down and down out of the first round, give the 49ers a player they wanted (with a 5th year option) while we lost the 5th year option and didn't get one of the guys that we needed.

Then the FO goes and trade for Brown during the year and proves the point........combined with Malik getting himself injured proving that point made PRIOR

You didn't think that we were in need of a good DT? I thought we needed one. And btw the FO proved that they really thought we needed one by trading for Sheldon Richardson too...

 

[kf3339]

I kinda look at Malik as a late first round pick where we got the 5th year option. But in pre- training camp practice he somehow tore his ACL and was out his first year. So they still got him for 4 more years. This scenario is no different than other players who have had a less than meaningful impact their rookie year.

Now, if he continues to not practice or play this next season then we have an issue and may need to part with him at some point. But right now I'm willing to give him the benefit of doubt and hope he comes on this year! There are far too many doubters on this board willing to call him a bust or whatever with no clear idea what is going on inside his head.

Let's just give him a chance, like any other rookie who struggled or wasn't able to play his first year.

 

[chris98251]

We don't know the details of his contract as far as liability if he wan tingly puts himself at risk, remember when Okung did the running with the Bulls there was a bit of talk as well.

 

[hawk45]

We don't know the details of his contract as far as liability if he wan tingly puts himself at risk, remember when Okung did the running with the Bulls there was a bit of talk as well.

People def weren't thrilled about running with the bulls, but in that instance it wasn't a case of the FO spending high capital on a guy with questionable motivation, so it's a bit of apples and oranges.

That said - and I think I said this earlier in the thread - the track record of this FO is even or better drafting players with off the field issues. To clarify: they've had players with issues who haven't popped, but the lack of pop has been for other football reasons, so lamenting the troubled-child draft approach as a way to get a bit better athlete/player is unwarranted.

 

[NorCalSeahawk]

A lot of interesting takes on McDowell, my only hope is the guy learns from his mistake (or bad judgment I suppose) and he is able to come back healthy and come back this year and contribute and add to this years draft class since he isn't credited with a NFL season yet.

 

[chris98251]

We don't know the details of his contract as far as liability if he wan tingly puts himself at risk, remember when Okung did the running with the Bulls there was a bit of talk as well.

People def weren't thrilled about running with the bulls, but in that instance it wasn't a case of the FO spending high capital on a guy with questionable motivation, so it's a bit of apples and oranges.

That said - and I think I said this earlier in the thread - the track record of this FO is even or better drafting players with off the field issues. To clarify: they've had players with issues who haven't popped, but the lack of pop has been for other football reasons, so lamenting the troubled-child draft approach as a way to get a bit better athlete/player is unwarranted.

Does not matter a rats ass about motivation, both were 1st round choices and a investment, both signed contracts, both would have been a big loss, Malik was since it required us to trade for Sheldon when other wise we may not have. Okung would have been also if he was injured. Looks , like Applesauce all the way thru to me.

 

[12HawkFan]

One thing is for sure, I would bet good money there is now some kind of clause in EVERY contract the Seahawks sign with most if not all and specifically big money players that specifically outlines what is and what is not considered risky and therefore "breach of contract" types of behavior. (Let it be known from this day forward it is to be called the "MM Clause")

Want to run with the bulls while you are under a multi million dollar contract and then get hurt doing so in a way that cuts your NFL career short or severely limits your once abundant abilities, your gonna be writing a big fat check back to the team or obtain enough insurance on your own dime to cover the re-payment.

If they don't like it, don't sign the contract and then cash the check with all the ZERO's on it, you have the rest of your post football life to act out your wildest fantasies on your own dime.

GO HAWKS!!!

 

[original poster]

Yeah provided the CBA allows that you can guarantee it.

I’d be surprised if something like that isn’t already written in though in honesty. He’s certainly not the first player to do something stupid after all.

 

[hawk45]

We don't know the details of his contract as far as liability if he wan tingly puts himself at risk, remember when Okung did the running with the Bulls there was a bit of talk as well.

People def weren't thrilled about running with the bulls, but in that instance it wasn't a case of the FO spending high capital on a guy with questionable motivation, so it's a bit of apples and oranges.

That said - and I think I said this earlier in the thread - the track record of this FO is even or better drafting players with off the field issues. To clarify: they've had players with issues who haven't popped, but the lack of pop has been for other football reasons, so lamenting the troubled-child draft approach as a way to get a bit better athlete/player is unwarranted.

Does not matter a rats ass about motivation, both were 1st round choices and a investment, both signed contracts, both would have been a big loss, Malik was since it required us to trade for Sheldon when other wise we may not have. Okung would have been also if he was injured. Looks , like Applesauce all the way thru to me.

No.

In Malik's case an argument can be made that the FO strategy of drafting iffy characters came back to bite them.

In Okung's case that argument can not be made because there were no character concerns.

So as it relates to evaluating the FO draft strategy the two examples could not be more different.

 

[chris98251]

We don't know the details of his contract as far as liability if he wan tingly puts himself at risk, remember when Okung did the running with the Bulls there was a bit of talk as well.

People def weren't thrilled about running with the bulls, but in that instance it wasn't a case of the FO spending high capital on a guy with questionable motivation, so it's a bit of apples and oranges.

That said - and I think I said this earlier in the thread - the track record of this FO is even or better drafting players with off the field issues. To clarify: they've had players with issues who haven't popped, but the lack of pop has been for other football reasons, so lamenting the troubled-child draft approach as a way to get a bit better athlete/player is unwarranted.

Does not matter a rats ass about motivation, both were 1st round choices and a investment, both signed contracts, both would have been a big loss, Malik was since it required us to trade for Sheldon when other wise we may not have. Okung would have been also if he was injured. Looks , like Applesauce all the way thru to me.

No.

In Malik's case an argument can be made that the FO strategy of drafting iffy characters came back to bite them.

In Okung's case that argument can not be made because there were no character concerns.

So as it relates to evaluating the FO draft strategy the two examples could not be more different.

Your talking a situation of if they choose to, they chose to, both players were on the team already, no difference then if it was Okung or Jon Ryan and his participation in that Athlete challenge that was on TV he also could have physically been injured, are you saying Ryan has character issues also?

Seahawks punter Jon Ryan tackled the 'American Ninja Warrior' course.

 

[WestcoastSteve]

After his latest brush with the law/media and his problems from whatever happened during his super secret accident I think the smartest thing may be just to get every penny of contract money back if they can and get some kind of relief for a draft pick that turned into a big fat ZERO that didn't ever even attend one practice much less take any snaps in a real NFL game.

Does anyone know for sure what the Hawks COULD ask for from the NFL?

GO HAWKS!!!

lmao, tell me this isnt a serious question

 

[adeltaY]

It's times like these I wish there was a way to get a draft pick back if he didn't even take the field and never plays due to a non-football injury. Seems fair, riiiight?